Augmented short undersized hamstring tendon graft with LARS® artificial ligament versus four-strand hamstring tendon in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: preliminary results

Hamido, Fawzy; Harran, H. Al; Misfer, A.R. Al; Khadrawe, Tanna El; Morsy, Mohamed G; Talaat, Alaa; Elias, Audrey Rc; Nagi, Ahmed

doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2015.01.021

Cited by 29 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…AOFAS and FAOS have been used for Achilles tendon rupture [10, 31], which were not developed for Achilles tendon pathologies specifically [8], and none of these questionnaire is translated and cross-cultural adapted into Chinese. SF-36 has been adapted into Chinese for the evaluation of general health status of patients [11]. The correlation with subscales of SF-36 was used for the evaluation of the constructive validity of CH-ATRS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The chinese version of achilles tendon total rupture score: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity

Cui

Jia

Zhi

et al. 2017

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS), which is originally developed in 2007 in Swedish, is the only patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for specific outcome assessment of an Achilles tendon rupture.Purpose of this study is to translate and cross-culturally adapt Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) into simplified Chinese, and primarily evaluate the responsiveness, reliability and validity.MethodsInternational recognized guideline which was designed by Beaton was followed to make the translation of ATRS from English into simplified Chinese version (CH-ATRS). A prospective cohort study was carried out for the cross-cultural adaptation. There were 112 participants included into the study. Psychometric properties including floor and ceiling effects, Cronbach’s alpha, intraclass correlation coefficient, effect size, standard response mean, and construct validity were tested.ResultsThe mean scores of CH-ATRS are 57.42 ± 13.70. No sign of floor or ceiling effect was found of CH-ATRS. High level of internal consistency was supported by the value of Cronbach’s alpha (0.893). ICC (0.979, 95%CI: 0.984-0.993) was high to indicate the high test-retest reliability. Great responsive ness was proved with the high absolute value of ES and SRM (0.84 and 8.98, respectively). The total CH-ATRS score had very good correlation with physical function and body pain subscales of SF-36 (r = −0.758 and r = −0.694, respectively, p < 0.001), while poor correlation with vitality and role physical subscales of SF-36 (r = −0.033 and r = −0.025, respectively, p ≥ 0.05), which supported construct validity of CH-ATRS.ConclusionThis Chinese version of Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (CH-ATRS) can be used as a reliable and valid instrument for Achilles tendon rupture assessing in Chinese-speaking population. Level of evidence II Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-016-0574-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The chinese version of achilles tendon total rupture score: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity

Cui

Jia

Zhi

et al. 2017

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After screening the titles and abstracts, 48 studies were excluded. After reading the full‐text of the remained 11 studies, we enrolled nine studies on 521 patients that met all inclusion criteria, including seven English and two Chinese articles. The literature search process is presented in Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the nine studies included in this review, there were three randomized controlled trial, the other six studies were relatively high‐quality retrospective study (Table ). One study used LARS as an augmentation to short or thin hamstring autograft rather than a sole constituent of the graft.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies used interference screw fixation for both tibial and femoral bone plugs in synthetic group, but most did not delineate whether these were metal or biocomposite, and only one study used bioabsorbable screw. Autograft fixation was slightly more variable, with femoral tunnels relying on interference screws in six studies, titanium button in two studies, bioabsorbable screw and crosspins in one study. The tibial fixation of autografts included interference screws in six studies, bioabsorbable screw in one study, steel plate in one study, and screw and/or spiked washer in one study.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arguably, autograft cruciate reconstruction is the gold standard, providing reliable long‐term results. Regardless of its type, autograft harvest can result in a degree of morbidity, which may negatively affect recovery after ACL reconstruction. The use of allografts has increased in recent years because they offer less donor‐site morbidity, shorter surgical and anesthesia times, fewer postoperative complications, faster postoperative recovery, lower incidence of postoperative arthrofibrosis, less postoperative pain, and an unlimited graft source in the setting of multi‐ligament and revision reconstructions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Autografts vs Synthetics for Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Sun

Wei

et al. 2020

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To describe the outcomes of autografts and synthetics in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction with respect to instrumented laxity measurements, patient-reported outcome scores, complications, and graft failure risk. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE for published randomized controlled trials (RCT) and case controlled trials (CCTs) to compare the outcomes of the autografts versus synthetics after cruciate ligament reconstruction. Data analyses were performed using Cochrane Collaboration RevMan 5.0. Nine studies were identified from the literature review. Of these studies, three studies compared the results of bonepatellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (LARS), while six studies compared the results of four-strand hamstring tendon graft (4SHG) and LARS. The comparative study showed no difference in Lysholm score and failure risk between autografts and synthetics. The combined results of the meta-analysis indicated that there was a significantly lower rate of side-to-side difference > 3 mm (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.46, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.44-4.22, P = 0.001), overall IKDC (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19-0.83, P = 0.01), complications (OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.26-5.14, P = 0.009), and Tegner score (OR −0.31, 95% CI −0.52-0.10, P = 0.004) in the synthetics group than in the autografts group. This systematic review comparing long-term outcomes after cruciate ligament reconstruction with either autograft or synthetics suggests no significant differences in failure risk. Autografts were inferior to synthetics with respect to restoring knee joint stability and patient-reported outcome scores, and were also associated with more postoperative complications.

show abstract

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Bone Tunnel Placement, Graft Choice, and Graft Fixation

Pratt,

McHardy,

Burnham

2023

Knee Arthroscopy and Knee Preservation Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Augmented short undersized hamstring tendon graft with LARS® artificial ligament versus four-strand hamstring tendon in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: preliminary results

Abstract: Level III (case control study).

Cited by 29 publications

References 22 publications

The chinese version of achilles tendon total rupture score: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity

The chinese version of achilles tendon total rupture score: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity

Autografts vs Synthetics for Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Bone Tunnel Placement, Graft Choice, and Graft Fixation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About